3/7/2017 17 th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case based - - PDF document
3/7/2017 17 th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case based - - PDF document
3/7/2017 17 th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case based Approach 17 th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case based Approach Overview Case 1: Californias End of Life Options Act End of Life Care 2017 Case 2:
3/7/2017 2
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act
- Mrs. Mobitz is 75 years old and was diagnosed one month ago with squamous cell
carcinoma of the lung. She is not interested in chemotherapy or immunotherapy, and would like the option of ending her life on her terms. She seems to interact normally with you, and does not appear to be clinically depressed – rather, she is resigned.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act
- Mrs. Mobitz is 75 years old and was diagnosed one month ago with squamous cell
carcinoma of the lung. 1.1) Her husband asks: “Is she eligible for the pill?”
- a. Yes, because she has less than six months, meeting the “definition” of terminal illness.
- b. Yes, if she continues to show evidence of having “capacity”.
- c. Yes, if there is no good evidence of depression or anxiety interfering with her judgment.
If present, this require evaluation by a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist.
- d. Yes, if she asks now, and again at least 15 days from today, and signs the “Attestation”
form (thereby providing a written request).
- e. All of the above
- f. Not of the above
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
EOLA California Requirements:
- Attending physician and consulting physician have diagnosed the patient with terminal
illness with six month or less life expectancy
- Patient has voluntarily expressed a desire to receive aid‐in‐dying medication
- Patient has the mental capacity to make and communicate healthcare decisions
- Patient is a resident of California
- Patient is at least 18 years old
- Patient has the physical ability to self‐administer and swallow the aid‐in‐dying
medication
- Applicable documentation must be completed by patient’s attending and consulting
physician
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act 1.2) You say, “ What makes you ask for something like this?” She answers that she does not want to die in terrible pain. How might you respond?
- a. Most cancer patients don’t die in terrible pain.
- b. We have lots of good pain medications
- c. Getting on to hospice care opens the door to having the focus of care be pain and
symptom management, and that hospice nurses are experts in this.
- d. Point out that for patients with intractable pain, “palliative sedation” brings state of
unconsciousness, so they don’t feel any pain.
- e. All of the above.
3/7/2017 3
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Initial Steps, EOLA Road Map:
Encourage Discussion Explore Patient Fears Elicit Understanding Respond to Emotions Establish Plan
Adapted from Palliative Care Network of Wisconsin. Palliative Fast Facts 23 Discussing DNR Orders. Von Gunten and Weissman May 2015.
Encourage Discussion:
- Recognize PAD inquiries as really inquiries
about death and dying
- Pause and transition discussion
- “Tell me more…”
- Acknowledge patient openness
- Most patients with advanced illness will
have already thought about dying at some point Explore Patient Fears:
- What about death is most concerning?
- What are you hoping for? What goals do
you have? In the time ahead, what is most important to you?
- Listen and respond
- Family members may be on different page
and have different goals Patient Understanding:
- What does the patient understand about
his/her/their illness and prognosis?
- Elicit with open‐ended questions
- Provide missing information
- Avoid medical jargon
Respond to Emotions:
- Allow for silence (it is your best friend)
- Monitor use of touch
Establish Plan:
- Not all ELOA requests are about proceeding
with physician aid in dying
- Most requests are about discussing fears
and worries about death and dying
- Clarify the individual plan to meet the goals
- f patient
- Focus on items that you will be offering to
patient versus what you will not
- Emphasize ongoing care regardless of
personal views
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act 1.3) A few weeks later, she says she still wants to pursue having the “pills,” because she wants to maintain as much control as possible. She seems to have capacity, has no apparent psychiatric condition, and you have her sign the “Attestation” form and you work through the MD “Checklist” form with her. What’s the next step?
- a. Give her the pills.
- b. There needs to be a second opinion from another MD.
- c. Refer to psychiatry because psychiatric evaluation is mandatory.
- d. You’ve decided you cannot participate – “Above all, do no harm”
- e. You don’t feel comfortable. The law does NOT mandate that you refer to a physician
who is willing to participate.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Requirements for the Consulting Physician In addition to the attending physician, a consulting physician who is independent from the attending physician needs to evaluate the patient. The consulting physician needs to: A.Examine the individual and his or her relevant medical records. B.Confirm in writing the attending physician’s diagnosis and prognosis. C.Determine that the individual has the capacity to make medical decisions, is acting voluntarily, and has made an informed decision. D.If there are indications of a mental disorder, refer the individual for a mental health specialist assessment. E.Fulfill the record documentation required under this part. F.Submit the compliance form to the attending physician.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Question for the panel— What have been your personal experiences at your respective institutions with California’s End of Life Options Act?
3/7/2017 4
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Overview Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Summary of Key points References
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life
- Mr. Jones is an 82 year old gentleman with pT3b N0 M0 high grade invasive papillary
urothelial carcinoma, who underwent a radical cystectomy with ileal conduit. He experienced his first recurrence one year later, for which he was treated with carboplatin and gemcitabine. He is admitted to the hospital with nausea and vomiting and found to have a malignant bowel obstruction.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life 2.1) A family meeting is held and the decision made to pursue hospice care. He has been
- n TPN during this admission. Should TPN be continued?
A) Artificial nutrition is not consistent with the philosophy of hospice and should be stopped B) TPN should be continued for now, but if the patient appears uncomfortable, then it should be withdrawn C) TPN should be continued until he has taken care of his business affairs D) The benefits and risks of TPN should be discussed with the patient and the decision of whether or not to continue TPN should be a shared decision
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Design:
- Review of 17 prospective, randomized controlled trials testing whether parenteral
nutrition would be clinically beneficial for cancer patients receiving either chemotherapy
- r radiation therapy
Results/Conclusions:
- No significant evidence that parenteral nutrition has a consistent positive effect
- Most studies have small numbers of patients, so small benefits can be missed
Koretz et al. J Clin Oncol 1984;2(5):534‐8
3/7/2017 5
Use of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in terminally ill gastrointestinal (GI) cancer patients (pts) compared to other malignancies (OM): A single‐institution experience. ASCO 2013 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium Abstract 309 J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 4; abstr 309) Design:
- Single‐institutional study of cancer patients with limited life expectancy given TPN
between 2007 – 2012. Compared patients with GI cancer vs other malignancy. Primary
- utcome survival.
Results/Conclusions:
- Median time from TPN to death was 55 days in GI group vs 77 days in other malignancy
group
- TPN complication rate was high, 68% of patients requiring readmission
- Quality of life did not improve
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life 2.2) His wife replies, if we stop artificial nutrition, aren’t you going to starve him to death? How should you respond? A) Starvation is a natural part of the dying process B) Remind her that he is dying of cancer C) Patient generally do not feel hungry at the end of life D) B and C
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Design:
- Prospective study of terminally ill patients in comfort care unit in Rochester, NY
- Symptoms of hunger, thirst, dry mouth were recorded, and amount of food/fluids
necessary to relieve these symptoms Results/Conclusions:
- Of 32 patients, 20 patients (63%) did not experience hunger and 11 patients (34%) had
- nly only initially
- 20 patients (62%) experienced no thirst or thirst only initially
- Symptoms were usually alleviated with small amounts of food, fluid, ice chips, or
lubrication of lips
McCann et al. JAMA 1994;272:1263‐1266
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life 2.3) His wife asks, “What if he gets thirsty? Can we give him IV hydration?” A) Sorry, we aren’t permitted to give IV hydration on hospice B) IV hydration has not been shown to improve symptoms of thirst C) Thirst can be managed by swabbing the mouth with water, artificial saliva, ice chips, or popsicles D) B and C
3/7/2017 6
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Design:
- 129 patients with cancer from six hospices randomized to
receive hydration (normal saline 1 L per day) vs placebo (normal saline 100 mL per day) daily over 4 hours.
- Primary outcome = sum of four dehydration sx (fatigue,
myoclonus, sedation and hallucinations) between day 4 and baseline. Secondary outcomes = QOL, survival Results/Conclusions:
- No significant differences between the two
groups for change in the sum of four dehydration symptoms
- 1 L of normal saline hydration daily did not
improve symptoms, quality of life, or survival
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Question for the panel: How do you navigate discussions around artificial nutrition in terminally ill patients, particularly in the face of social and emotional factors that may influence these conversations?
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Overview Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Summary of Key points References
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy 59‐year‐old woman was diagnosed with p16 negative squamous cell carcinoma (T2 N2b M0) of the right tonsillar region. She underwent chemo‐radiation, but recurred 4 months later with pulmonary metastases. She was started on an experimental phase 1 drug trial with nivolumab. 3.1) What do you tell her about her prognosis? A) You tell her that her prognosis is guarded and she has likely months to live B) You let her know that phase 1 trials are looking primarily at safety, and we cannot tell the efficacy at this point in time C) You let her know that you are hopeful for the future, and that she should plan on attending her planned family events over the coming year D) A and B
3/7/2017 7
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
We used to know…but we over‐estimated
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy She was seen by palliative medicine in May of 2015. They went over many aspects of her illness and also spoke about prognosis and her fears about end of life. Her palliative care doctor notes that: ‐‐Pt understands her malignancy is not curable. ‐‐Pt fears/worries about how the end will look. Cared for her mother as she died from cancer. ‐‐Pt’s hopes/goals are: Patient doesn't want to suffer. Wants to die at home. Control over the process. ‐‐Pt does not have an advance directive. Introduced role of AD. Reviewed how to
- complete. Patient to review at home and continue discussions at future appointments.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy 3.2) How should the palliative care doctor advise the patient? A) Encourage her to come off the clinical trial since it is not in line with her goals of care B) Let her know that you will support her while she is on trial, and that if the toxicities become too burdensome you will work with her to consider alternatives including supportive care and hospice C) Ask her to complete her AD as soon as possible. It is clear that there is limited time left D) B and C
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy She continued on clinical trial for 1.5 years. In November of 2016 her lipase was significantly elevated and she was discontinued from clinical trial due to drug toxicity. At this time she also looked more frail, and had lost about 5% of her body weight. 3.3) In light of this information, what would recommend? A) Enrollment on hospice B) Wait and see. A follow up in a few months might be appropriate C) Re‐engaging in a discussion around her goals of care D) All of the above
3/7/2017 8
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy
Talking about prognosis in the era of immunotherapy is fraught with uncertainty
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy She was seen by her team in January of 2017. Her lipase has come back to normal. Her scans show no evidence of recurrence. She has plans to travel on vacation with her family and continues to take care of her grand‐daughter full time. She hopes to re‐start nivolumab with her local oncologist when her disease returns 3.4) How would you approach discussions about the future? A) You realize you should have never shared prognosis with her, we are always wrong B) You tell her that you are glad that she is doing well, and hope she continues to do so for a long time, but we are not sure how long that will be C) Communicate with compassion and empathy D) B and C
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 5 cont:
- Patients want to know, and often soon after their diagnosis.
- Oncologists often wait to talk to their patients about prognosis
- If patients know their prognosis they are able to make good
decisions
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
So what now? Thought question for the panel: When we knew definitely about prognosis we were not great at sharing that information (the days of chemotherapy only). Now in the era of targeted therapy and immunotherapy how do we share prognostic information in an accurate and empathic way?
3/7/2017 9
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Overview Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Summary of Key points References
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care
- Ms. McKenna is a 68 year old woman with a history of metastatic mesothelioma, who was
diagnosed in 2012, and has now progressed after carboplatin/pemetrexed, gemcitabine, navelbine, and pembrolizumab. She is interested in more treatment. She also has been struggling with nausea, constipation, and lower extremity edema. She is self‐referred to the medical oncology clinic for a second opinion.
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care 4.1) When should palliative care referral be made? A) At the time of diagnosis B) Difficult‐to‐manage symptoms, regardless of prognosis C) Poor prognosis D) When there are frequent hospital visits or hospital readmissions E) All of the above
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
- Review of 7 published randomized controlled trials
- Integration of palliative of care into standard oncology care may improve symptoms,
quality of life, mood, satisfaction, cost of care, and potentially survival in patients with cancer Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care
3/7/2017 10
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Question for the audience— How many practitioners in the audience have access to a palliative care physician? (please raise your hand)
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Reflection question for the panel— What are some of the barriers you have experienced to early palliative care referral?
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Thought question for the panel— What kinds of health policy, reimbursement mechanisms, or clinical models would support additional clinic‐based and community‐based palliative care services?
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Overview Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Summary of Key points References
3/7/2017 11
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Key points:
- Attending physician and consulting physician have diagnosed the patient with terminal
illness with six month or less life expectancy
- Patient has voluntarily expressed a desire to receive aid‐in‐dying medication
- Patient has the mental capacity to make and communicate healthcare decisions
- Patient has the physical ability to self‐administer and swallow the aid‐in‐dying
medication
- Be open to discussing fears and worries about death and dying
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Key points:
- There is no significant evidence that parenteral nutrition at the end of life has a
consistent positive effect
- Many patients at the end of life do not experience thirst or hunger. Symptoms were
usually alleviated with small amounts of food, fluid, ice chips, or lubrication of lips
- 1 L of normal saline hydration daily did not improve symptoms, quality of life, or
survival in the hospice setting
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Key points
- Until there are more reliable biomarkers for predicting response to immunotherapy,
discussing prognosis continue to be a challenge
- Patients want to know their prognosis, often soon after diagnosis
- There is still much to be learned
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Key points:
- Integration of palliative of care into standard oncology care may improve quality of life,
cost of care, and potentially survival in patients with cancer
- There are still physician, patient, and system barriers to early palliative care referrals
- There is potential for further development of clinic‐based and community palliative
care programs
3/7/2017 12
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
Overview Case 1: California’s End of Life Options Act Case 2: Nutrition at the end of life Case 3: Prognosis in the era of immunotherapy Case 4: Early integration of palliative care into oncology care Summary of Key points References
17th Multidisciplinary Management of Cancers: A Case‐based Approach
References
Case 1: Adapted from Palliative Care Network of Wisconsin. Palliative Fast Facts 23 Discussing DNR Orders. Von Gunten and Weissman May 2015. Case 2: August et al. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 2009;33:472‐500 McCann et al. JAMA 1994;272:1263‐1266 Weiner et al. J Clin Oncol 1985;3:949‐957 Winter et al. Am J Med 2000;109:723‐726 Bruera et al. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:111‐118 Koretz et al. J Clin Oncol 1984;2(5):534‐8 Case 3: Brahmer, NEJM, 2015 Yung, JCO, 2004 Daughery, JCO, 2008 Case 4: Smith et al. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:880‐887 Partridge et al. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3330‐3336 Temel et al. N Engl J Med 2010;363:733‐742 Greer et al. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:394‐400 Bakitas et al. J Clin Oncol 2015;33(13):1438‐45. NHPCO Facts and Figures: Hospice Care in America. Alexandria, VA: National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization; 2013 Dalal et al. Oncologist 2011;16:105‐111.